Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Science Officer Ash

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to List of characters in the Alien series. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Science Officer Ash

Science Officer Ash (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Non notable secondary character with no references or sources. Daniel J. Leivick 01:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Also nominating the following secondary Aliens characters with similar formats.

  • Delete per nominator; fails notability. Yuser31415 01:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Please provide an explanation. This is not a vote, this is a concensus. --Dennisthe2 02:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
      • So clarified. Yuser31415 06:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

He is a relevant character, who plays an important role, you obviously haven't seen Alien, DO NOT DELETE

  • It is interesting that you should say that as Alien is my favorite movie of all time, I have seen it more times than I have seen any other movie. But none of these characters are notable outside of the film, if they are the topics of any articles that assert there notability please reference it on the page for the character in question, I would definitely be interested.Daniel J. Leivick 02:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep. I can't justify a delete because there aren't really insignificant characters in Alien, but I'm not sure that Wikipedia is the right place for character stories. If anything, merge the characters with their respective films. --Dennisthe2 02:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong keep. I assume we are throwing in our fourpenneth on all 4 nominations here so.... General point: If anyone wants references and sources for anything then drop in the appropriate tag and someone will try and address it. Obviusly there are the fims bit, if you want one from a source other than the films, then Beautiful Monsters covers them all and there are other volumes for other films [1] - the first step is to ask for them though (no one has). I would also query their being defined as "non-notable secondary characters" in the proposal - they are important supporting characters in a major (even iconic) film. There are, potentially, non-notable members of the cast but they don't have an entry. Let's look at some of them: Kane has the most iconic scene in the film (in fact it is one of the most famous in cinema). Bishop plays an important role in the first 2 films and appears in the third (reappearing as another version of the android at the end) and appears as the man the design is based on in another film - surely a character whose appearances span 4 films (as well as appearing in a whole range of spin-off merchandise) has to tick the notable box. I could go on but I hope I have made my point. (Emperor 02:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC))
  • CommentThe reason I chose not to ask for sources was that I have a pretty good knowledge of Alien literature and the like, this is not to say that it is impossible that some of these article could be sourced, I would just be surprised. The problem is not that these characters are not important within the film (that is why they are mentioned in the plot summaries) but that there are no external sources referenced. In order to be notable in Wikipedia terms the character has to be the subject in multiple third party sources, non of these characters are. The subject of Beaurtiful Monsters is not Ash or Dallas but the Alien and Predator series.
  • Comment Well yes I doubt there are any actual books about the characters - the best you'll usually get are books on the films (or possibly some media studies papers - the Ripley entry also needs beefing up in the reference department with that in mind). The problem is we are in a bit of a Catch 22 - no one has bothered asking for references and the entries are damned for not providing them. There is a process and we seem to have skipped a stage. I doubt I could find enough references in the time requied for all of the entries. I also think it is unfortunate they appear to have been lumped together as less strong cases will drag down the keepers - I genuinely think it is a mistake throwing Bishop in with the others as his multiple film appearances should make it a dead cert if it had been proposed on its own. (Emperor 03:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC))
  • Delete everyone of these offers nothing but a plot summary. None have any secondary sources. WP:NOT states: Wikipedia articles on works of fiction should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's achievements, impact or historical significance, not solely a summary of that work's plot.. WP:FICTION states: Minor characters (and places, concepts, etc.) in a work of fiction should be merged with short descriptions into a "List of characters." These are the articles that should be built at avp.wikia.com. --maclean 02:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete- per above--SUIT42 02:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. It's simply unacceptable for articles to consist of only two factual statements followed by a large, undigested lump of storyline. Wikipedia is not a fan guide, nor should we rewrite every article about every film to shift focus from character to character. Postdlf 03:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. We have fictional biographies for many other characters including the Simpsons and American Dad. I hope we aren't going to throw them away in 30 years. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk • contribs) 06:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC).
    • "Keep, because it's a fictional character"? Please address the particular merits of these articles and subjects. Postdlf 06:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
    • "Simpsons are irrelevant to this discussion" - It is entirely possible that the other fictional articles you mentioned should also be deleted. It may very well be pop culture information worth remembering well into the future - but the question here is whether Wikipedia is the right place for it. Much of the article appears to be plot summary of the Alien film, which is already provided in the main Alien article. I think this could be merged back to the main article with no great loss. Zaku kai 20:15, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep or Merge Either into the movie itself, or a list of characters from the movie. I'm not especially troubled with the problem of sourcing these articles, these are notable movies, all of these characters are more than just a walk-on guy, but if you object to them having their own article, they should be well-described in the movie's page. FrozenPurpleCube 16:24, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep some, merge some. Bishop is certainly not a minor character, and the article on him provides a good synthesis of a lot of detail from the multiple movies he appears in, so I'd !vote a strong keep for him. Since Ash is only in the one movie, his information could be merged, but he's fairly central to the plot and I think deserving of a separate article. For the others, I'd keep them if I ran the world, but would be happy to compromise on a merge to Alien or a new Alien characters article, since they're not as important. Pinball22 16:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to a list of Minor characters in Alien with dramatically reduced plot summaries as per WP:FICT for minor characters. If any evidence of out-of-universe notability of any of the characters is found, consider recreating those articles separately. Cheers --Pak21 17:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment That'd be a suitable compromise (I was always suprised there wasn't one but having some many character entries meant it wasn't worth creating one). Would it be worth making it a list of characters in the Alien movie series or just for the Alien film with longer character outlines (I'd slightly favour the latter). As per what I said above and Pinball's comments I think Bishop needs his own entry. I have done some digging and can expand the entry to look at the academic studies of him (as he touches on various aspects - I'll expand his entry soon). (Emperor 17:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC))
  • Keep Bishop, merge the rest. The Proffesor 18:45, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I've now updated the Bishop entry with 4 academic papers where Bishop is a central example for the various points they want to make. [2] (Emperor 19:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC))
  • Merge to a list of minor characters in Alien. It is unencyclopedic to break up works of fiction in separate pages for each non-notable character, location, weapon, monster etc. Edison 20:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete all except Bishop for lack of encyclopedic noteworthiness. These articles also fail to explain where their information comes from. Not all of this stuff is mentioned in the movie(s). For most of these characters, their history need only be covered by the Alien article. For Bishop, however, his article helps cover his treatment over multiple films and non-film sources. Doczilla 21:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge Seperate articles for secondary characters are confusing. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 21:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge all but Bishop (Alien) to a new characters list, e.g. List of characters in the Alien series, to be consistent with Category:Lists of fictional characters by series. (Reduce the amount of content somewhat, though.) However, Bishop's notable across several films, and has enough background information (including that "academic importance" section) to justify an independent article, so strong keep for him. Quack 688 01:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge all (except Bishop) to list of List of characters in the Alien series per Quack 688. The Alien Quadrilogy seems notable enough for a list of characters. Strong keep for Bishop (Alien) as he appears in two films and is a very major character in Aliens (film). WJBscribe (WJB talk) 09:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete or merge. Unencyclopedic trivia. Eusebeus 13:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge most, maybe keep Bishop per Quack 688. highlunder 13:55, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I really don't see why this is even up for debate. List of Characters in the Alien series. Go!Darkwarriorblake 00:37, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.